From andyl@harlequin.com Thu Dec 16 10:45:09 1993 Return-Path: Received: from hilly.harlequin.com by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) for /com/archive/cube-lovers id AA01251; Thu, 16 Dec 93 10:45:09 EST Received: from epcot.harlequin.com by hilly.harlequin.com; Thu, 16 Dec 1993 10:36:13 -0500 Received: from phaedrus.harlequin.com (phaedrus) by epcot.harlequin.com; Thu, 16 Dec 1993 10:38:46 -0500 From: Andy Latto Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 10:38:45 -0500 Message-Id: <21332.199312161538@phaedrus.harlequin.com> To: Don.Woods@eng.sun.com Cc: cube-lovers@ai.mit.edu In-Reply-To: Don Woods's message of Wed, 15 Dec 93 17:39:20 PST <9312160139.AA26306@colossal.Eng.Sun.COM> Subject: Description of Tangle, Part 2 Date: Wed, 15 Dec 93 17:39:20 PST From: Don.Woods@eng.sun.com (Don Woods) X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII Content-Length: 897 > Is this the reason why Rubik has gone into hiding? I haven't seen any > puzzle from him after this set of 4 released in 1990/1991. Hm, didn't "Square-1" come out later than the Tangles? Did Rubik have anything to do with Square-1? In any case, it's a great puzzle, and I recommend it to anyone on the list who hasn't tried it. While there's a group structure lurking here as usual, this is the only puzzle I've seen where the set of attainable positions is not a subgroup. This means lots of the usual ways of thinking about puzzles like this (e.g. conjugation) don't always work, which makes it quite challenging. Andy Latto andyl@harlequin.com